I'm going to be upgrading my x1950xt 256mb soon to either a 8800gt or 8800gts (the new g92 version). I play UT3, Bioshock, TF2, and hoping to play Crysis better with this upgrade. I was wondering 2 things.
First if I was to choose the 8800gt, using a 1440x900 monitor, could I get away with 256mb or would it be better to go with the famous 512mb version?
Secondly, if the 8800GTS, would it better in the long run vs. GT?
I want to get my money's worth and have it go as far as I can (time-wise).
If you can find the GTS for $30 or so more than a GT then it is definately worth it for the better cooler if not for the better performance. Honestly, they are very very close cards. The GTS is clocked a little higher and has 12 more sp's. A few FPS difference.
They are very close and the 8800 GTS out performs it by alot. THe 8800 GT is around 189.99 and the GTS is 200-220. lol I'd rather spend an extra 20$ and have something that kills. I meant he 8800 GTS (G92) has been known to match the 8800 GTX and also perform as well as the 9800 GTX.
I just upgraded from an x1950xt @ 1440x900 res to an 8800GTS 512, which is what I'd recommend, especially since there are some on sale at Newegg for sub-$200, but I personally think you should wait, given my experiences with the new card's performance.
On one hand, I'm now able to crank up all settings in Oblivion to max and load up some large texture packs [no AA with the texture packs] and still get playable framerates.
The thing is, though, that my x1950xt could take pretty much anything I threw at it. Hell, I was playing Crysis on high/med at about 25fps. Now I can play Crysis on high at a slightly higher speed, but I can't honestly see much of a difference visually. That said, I think I should have held onto the x1950xt, which has for the most part been performing very well, and waited until the new line of processors came out.
I'm not one of those people that just keeps waiting for the newer and better when it's on the horizon, but in this situation, it might be the best idea. The R770 is supposed to be considerably quicker than the 8800GTS 512, and if that's the case, then I'd go with that. You have to realize that although it's a great card, the GTS 512 only has the performance of a 18-month old technology. That said, while it's new technology, it's going to be quite a bit behind performance-wise once the new cards come out.
So, while the change from the x1950xt to the GTS 512 was noticeable, I don't think it was significant enough to warrant my haste. I thought it was going to be like going from my 6600 to the x1950xt.
That said, I'd at least wait until the new chips come out and see how they perform. Worst happens is that the price of the 8800GTS 512 drops and you can get it cheaper.
IMHO, the best thing to do is wait. Unless you need DX10 now, your present card is okay for a month or so.
I'd wait till June 15th or so when the 4xxx arrives. I think the 4850 GDDR3 will arrive first and the 4870 GDDR5 next. The 4870x2 will probably arrive in the fall.
The 8800gts 512 is a good card, but if you must go Nvidia, then wait for the arrival of G280. Even if the first card's an overpriced monster GPU, it will drop the prices of G92 current cards a bit.
An 8800gts 512 won't be obsolete, but too many good cards are right around the corner.
How often do you guys switch out GPU's? I went 7600gs when I built my first Athlon X2 system in February 2007 because the 8800 series wasn't out. When that disappointed in DX10, I just decided to wait and finally switched my CPU over to a 690 board so I could go 3870x2 this last February.
Prior to that, I had a P4 with an AIW 9800 Pro followed by an X1650 Pro. So, I kept those cards for quite awhile. I can't see keeping old tech, but new tech has to provide real advantages before I upgrade. This summer's refresh of cards seems like they will provide real advantages to most gamers (though my 3870x2 is capable enough -- the 4870 will be just as fast, albeit without scaling issues).